View Full Version : Aristide
The Red Next Door
6th August 2010, 20:22
I heard people call him, a social democratic traitor, is this true give me. A download on The exile Hatian President.
Raúl Duke
6th August 2010, 20:27
Aren't you missing an e...
The guy's name is Aristide, if I recall. Isn't he the guy with the Lavalas party mentioned in the Wyclef thread?
I don't know much about him, except that there's been coups against him. Some say that the coups were US supported.
The Red Next Door
6th August 2010, 20:40
Aren't you missing an e...
.
oops
Raúl Duke
6th August 2010, 21:05
A mod or admin might fix it in the near future.
Proletarian Ultra
6th August 2010, 21:20
I don't know anything about him, other than he gets couped by the US every time he's in power...so really he can't be all that bad.
Chimurenga.
6th August 2010, 21:45
If I remember correctly, Aristide, the first time around, wanted to raise the wages up from whatever it was (I think 50 cents) to something like three or four dollars and the US had a big problem with that. There may or may not have been some land reform there as well.
And yeah, Aristide is a Social Democrat.
Barry Lyndon
6th August 2010, 21:58
There is a great book on Aristide called 'An Unbroken Agony: From Revolution to the kidnapping of a President' by Randall Robinson, who was an advisor to Aristide during the 2004 coup de tat.
Aristide was a Catholic populist, but definitely had socialist sympathies(he invited a large contingent of Cuban doctors to assist the building of Haiti's health care system). He was by far the most progressive leader Haiti had in 200 years, especially after the horrific misrule of the Duvaliers.
I wrote a whole research paper on this, I might post it later.
howblackisyourflag
6th August 2010, 22:29
Chomsky is a big fan of him so he must be allright.
He was elected, overthrown with US, and possibly French support.
The imperialists dont like him so he's ok in my book.
Proletarian Ultra
6th August 2010, 23:50
I think 'social democrat' is a misleading way to describe someone whose party has its own militia.
Chimurenga.
6th August 2010, 23:55
I think 'social democrat' is a misleading way to describe someone whose party has its own militia.
Would "armed popular reformists" better suit the Lavalas Party?
Kléber
6th August 2010, 23:56
I think 'social democrat' is a misleading way to describe someone whose party has its own militia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Front
Aristide is a tricky character. He was deposed by the US, but before that he had been installed by the US. The international financial establishment was afraid he would return to Haiti, but perhaps he is afraid to do so himself. Petty-bourgeois nationalists simply can not be counted on to make revolution.
The Vegan Marxist
7th August 2010, 01:50
If you can get your hands on a copy of "Aristide & the Endless Revolution", it's a great documentary on the US supported coup d'etat that brought him out of power in 2004.
Proletarian Ultra
7th August 2010, 02:35
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Front
touche.
chegitz guevara
7th August 2010, 04:38
Aristide was a social democrat, 1st time around. 2nd time around, he was a puppet. 3rd time around, he was corrupt as all hell.
The Red Next Door
7th August 2010, 04:53
Aristide was a social democrat, 1st time around. 2nd time around, he was a puppet. 3rd time around, he was corrupt as all hell.
Explain.
The Vegan Marxist
7th August 2010, 05:20
Aristide was a social democrat, 1st time around. 2nd time around, he was a puppet. 3rd time around, he was corrupt as all hell.
That's because the US kept pressuring him into the crap he did. Put leaders in a position of wrongdoing, in which becomes necessary, then gain the people's support in order to make successful coup d'etat. I mean, this is exactly what we're seeing in Zimbabwe.
Zimbabwe's economy thrives based on their diamond sales. Now, through the Kimberly Process, their sales have been legit. But then all of a sudden the US starts blaming them with un-proven claims of human rights violations within Marange diamond fields in Zimbabwe. And so now they're putting a sanction against them on their diamond trades.
Why are they doing this? Well President Mugabe started land redistribution reforms in Zimbabwe in order to get the poor in homes, or at least some kind of shelter, & it'll put 51% of Zimbabwe's economy in the hands of Zimbabweans, instead of colonial nations like the US. So the US are putting economical pressures on President Mugabe by sanctioning against their only connection in keeping their economy alive. What they're hoping this'll do is either make Mugabe resign his position, or Mugabe to embrace the selling of conflict diamonds, which would be against the Kimberly Process, & get Mugabe arrested & taken out of his position as President.
Proletarian Ultra
7th August 2010, 07:28
I don't really give a shit about Aristide's politics.
The fact is, he's popular, he's not a reactionary, and at the moment, his exclusion is the principal contradiction in Haitian politics. Supporting Lavalas' right to nominate him must be the top priority in Haitian solidarity activism, or barring that, denouncing any election process that excludes him. Now, if he were allowed to run and happened to win, his shortcomings would become the principal contradiction, and combatting them would be the top priority. But it's really a waste of time to struggle against Aristide now that he's in exile - where? fucking Central African Republic or some shit?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2020 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.